Dmitrijs Ledkovs <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>On 4 September 2013 12:09, Scott Kitterman <email@example.com>
>> Dmitrijs Ledkovs <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Changes like this should really be coordinated in Debian so we don't
>accumulate long term differences that can't easily be resolved.
>Yeah, and as far as I know Timo is doing excellent work at keeping
>packaging in sync as much as possible.
>But e.g. w.r.t. multiarch & cross-compilation overall at the moment
>Debian is still far behind Ubuntu, despite myself and many others
>pushing many mutli-arch changes back to debian.
He is. For changes that can't be pushed to Debian now (I guess such as this), there should still be up front coordination on the approach so Ubuntu doesn't head off in one direction and discover later that it's unacceptable in Debian and then Ubuntu is stuck with a permanent diff or a lot of rework.
If such coordination has been done, I haven't seen it on what I would imagine to be the relevant lists.
>> Why do you need to cross compile QML anyway? It's not like you need
>it for bootstrapping.
>This is not to cross compile QML itself. This is for 3rd party
>developers to cross-compile their compiled qml extensions against
>ubuntu's armhf qt to be included as part of their applications for
>Or e.g. to cross-compile ubuntu-touch-settings or other packages we
>have in the archive that have qml extensions.
>Going via this route though (make qmake support cross-compilation with
>a debian specific toolchain file), will eventually make possible to
>cross-compile qt itself and also be upstream able patches for qmake.
It sounds at least vaguely reasonable. My main concern is that the coordination is done.
ubuntu-devel mailing list
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel